What's new
By:

What the Jazz should do

utahjazz107

utahjazz107

Active Member
1) Draft Knight at 3
2) Trade Jefferson and 12 for Danny Granger, Brandon Rush and Future 1st Round Pick (Not protected)
3) Trade Harris, Bell and for Bogut. (I think they just want to unload his contract and I think he's going to be 100% healthy soon)

PG: Knight/Watson/Price
SG: Hayward/Brandon Rush
SF: Granger/AK47/Evans
PF: Favors/Millsap
C: Bogut/Okur

That's a playoff team IMO. The second unit looks better than half of the Eastern teams starting lineups.
 
I don't understand how the Jazz SHOULD do that since Indiana and Milwaukee both say no, and then you'd probably bitch about it being O'Connor's fault.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
I don't understand how the Jazz SHOULD do that since Indiana and Milwaukee both say no, and then you'd probably bitch about it being O'Connor's fault.
Click to expand...


Except the Pacers would easily because they are sold on Paul George as the future of their franchise not Granger. They get a solid big man in Jefferson to play the 4. Think of a duo of Hibbert and Jefferson, that's a big PF/C combo. They get a draft pick so they can draft Jimmer and Marshon Brooks either could start at SG


As for the Bucks, they think Bogut is overpaid and injury-prone. I think Bogut had some bad luck playing with the Bucks. They aren't to high on Jennings and they could play Harris and Jennings together along with Salmons making the Bucks one of the most dangerous backcourts in the NBA
 
I agree, the Pacers would like this trade.. I'm not sure about the Bucks. I would rather have Harris over Jennings though if I were them, even considering age.
 
Chad Feldheimer said:
You really want to go with a 19 year old rookie PG as your starter? Keep Harris for at least one more year.
Click to expand...

Why? So his value can plausibly diminish and the Jazz win more games in a year that won't matter anyway (giving Minnesota optimal-value on the pick they're owed or giving the Jazz minimized value on their draft pick if they get to keep it)?
 
Trade Jefferson for Hibbert straight up assuming that portion of the CBA remains, thus getting massive salary cap space and spending it on Marc Gasol. If that fails, you still get a well-rounded, fundamentally strong, fairly productive giant, and if it works, you can trade him for something else.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Why? So his value can plausibly diminish and the Jazz win more games in a year that won't matter anyway (giving Minnesota optimal-value on the pick they're owed or giving the Jazz minimized value on their draft pick if they get to keep it)?
Click to expand...

Glad you said it. I'm not sure if I've been around long enough to be so bold. I'd rather take next year, give the young guys TONS of playing time and experience, pick up another nice piece or two in '12, and be serious about winning a lot of games thereafter.
 
PKM said:
Glad you said it. I'm not sure if I've been around long enough to be so bold. I'd rather take next year, give the young guys TONS of playing time and experience, pick up another nice piece or two in '12, and be serious about winning a lot of games thereafter.
Click to expand...

And I'm not saying tank, but since Harris is not or SHOULD not be in the longterm picture, it seems like bad asset management to sit on him. Harris's market-value will be tied to Knight's performance anyway, so either Knight does well and teams will line up to pay cents on the dollar, or Knight won't look good and only then will the Jazz get fair-value offers for Harris (which for most teams probably won't be that great anyway since most teams have good PGs).

However, I will be bold enough to say that if the worst-case scenario is that the Jazz get another top-10 pick in what is heralded as an absolutely packed draft, then I can live with that.
 
I'm not saying tank, at all. I'm saying if you have a 3 year plan, or whatever, then work toward that by getting your guys the experience they're going to need three years down the road. Makes no sense, to me, to sit your future players while you play, at a non-contender level, with declining assets. IF (if) in the process you pick up another great young assets, all the better. It's not tanking, it's asset management and working your plan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top